Can't have order without chaos...or chaos without order....relative terms.

Subjective terms.

The claim that "order" implies "intelligence" is a flawed argument. Since Earth is the ONLY known place with life does that mean the rest of the universe is chaotic? Or if it also shows order despite a lack of life then life itself is not evidence of an intervening intelligence, in which case "order" is simply the natural physical constants of our particular expansion phase. Other universes will also be "ordered" but simply have different physical constants. And as always in each case an intervening intelligence will be an undemonstrated assumption. Perhaps possible. But undemonstrated.

<quoted text>So "religiosity" would be a natural construct of the human mind that transcends all ancient and present day cultures...what purpose would it serve in terms of evolution?...surly not one of evolutionary survival."religiosity" would seem to me, to be directly related to a higher perception of reality....No mention of great apes, or monkeys, or any animal for that matter in this article practicing religiosity....why?It would seem that if we were so closely related as implied by the evolution theory, then religiosity would be readily apparent in the animal kingdom. I cannot even think of one example...can you?( The praying mantis might be an exception...but I don't think that would that really count?....do you?...lol

Yes you are right but I don't think religion is necessary for one to achieve a higher perception of reality. I'm not religious but I'm spiritual. There is a difference.

Animals don't have an awareness like humans do. Have you seen one get high? If they did who knows what could happen. lol

Although I consider animals to be somewhat spiritual. They do mourn for the dead and do burial rituals. Elephants are one good example of that. It's just in a different level than humans.

The point is delusions may have resulted from altered consciousness. The pharaohs of Egypt believed they were reincarnate of the Gods. And I believe they tried substances to achieve such altered states. Heard of presences of drugs in mummies?

Indeed, often their awareness is better. That's why many animals have better senses of hearing, taste, touch, smell and eyesight. It's quite common for animals to flee storms long before we have any clue what's coming.

<quoted text>Indeed, often their awareness is better. That's why many animals have better senses of hearing, taste, touch, smell and eyesight. It's quite common for animals to flee storms long before we have any clue what's coming.

The claim that "order" implies "intelligence" is a flawed argument. Since Earth is the ONLY known place with life does that mean the rest of the universe is chaotic? Or if it also shows order despite a lack of life then life itself is not evidence of an intervening intelligence, in which case "order" is simply the natural physical constants of our particular expansion phase. Other universes will also be "ordered" but simply have different physical constants. And as always in each case an intervening intelligence will be an undemonstrated assumption. Perhaps possible. But undemonstrated.

You assume that intelligence requires consciousness? Look at the complexity of our DNA. That complexity hardly suggests that we were constructed by an all knowing being.

<quoted text>Subjective terms.The claim that "order" implies "intelligence" is a flawed argument. Since Earth is the ONLY known place with life does that mean the rest of the universe is chaotic? Or if it also shows order despite a lack of life then life itself is not evidence of an intervening intelligence, in which case "order" is simply the natural physical constants of our particular expansion phase. Other universes will also be "ordered" but simply have different physical constants. And as always in each case an intervening intelligence will be an undemonstrated assumption. Perhaps possible. But undemonstrated.

read the statement dude...I did not say or imply intelligence....I said that order and chaos are relative...gaseous nebulae are consider chaotic in relationship to a star before it is formed, but consider orderly if compared to space dust that is uncondensed.

<quoted text>read the statement dude...I did not say or imply intelligence....I said that order and chaos are relative...gaseous nebulae are consider chaotic in relationship to a star before it is formed, but consider orderly if compared to space dust that is uncondensed.

<quoted text>Actually yes, one of evolutionary survival - develop a set of cultural practices encouraging others to participate. Co-operation leads to survival advantages. Those who do not involve themselves in any of those groups may be considered an outcast and be at a survival disadvantage.This is the very reason why religions exist today, despite having a lack of scientific evidence to back them up.<quoted text>Your personal subjective opinion is irrelevant.<quoted text>They lack the ability to communicate in abstract forms.<quoted text>It would seem that way only to the incredulous. It is even quite possible that some apes may have religious ideas of their own, but they unfortunately aren't able to communicate their ideas to their brethren. Dolphins might however, but their language is simply far too complex for humans to understand.

Actually yes, one of evolutionary survival - develop a set of cultural practices encouraging others to participate. Co-operation leads to survival advantages. Those who do not involve themselves in any of those groups may be considered an outcast and be at a survival disadvantage.

cultural participation works just as well without religion...so this would Imply a different reason.

(Not to mention religious wars which is detrimental to the species as a whole)

cultural participation works just as well without religion...so this would Imply a different reason.(Not to mention religious wars which is detrimental to the species as a whole)

Yes, religion is not required, but is still on valid route to communal cooperation. As you pointed out war, competition with other communities is also an issue, and the potential benefits (real or imagined) of belonging to a particular group can help strengthen that group by acquiring more, or maintaining adherents.

<quoted text>It happened at the command of the Creator and the universe and the earth did not take billions of years to answer to his word.

And his almighty felt it necessary to create elaborate evidence just to trick us? Why? Why shouldn't I just decide that a bunch of ignorant shaman are just playing word games and trying to wear everyone out?

Yeah, you've got a lot of company in that category, but I'll take a seat and watch the show when that comes on!

<quoted text>They don't. In fact there are numerous scientific organisations across the world who are working on that very subject. But it's more of a subject for chemists than for biologists. It still has no bearing on evolution, which doesn't care if life was magically poofed into existence, just as long as life is here. Life IS here. Life evolves. Facts.

You'll get yourself stuck up a tree if you don't keep the context straight. None of us have the time to sit around and observe evolution in action. We just analyze what is around us and calculate probability. If you phrase Evolution science any other way, you'll just waste time on other people's stupid debate tactics.

I'd rather ignore the trolls by encouraging thoughtful comments. I'm not interested in taking a victory lap around the city walls for skewering a troll.

<quoted text>By the same token, the assertion of an intelligent process without evidence is also entirely ego based. For example: an invisible magical Jewish wizard that created the universe especially for us.

<quoted text> We are not talking about politics or nationalism but on homosexuality.

No, we are talking about Evolution vs. Creation.

In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only person who has had the sense to challenge the liberal advocates who suggest that "homosexuality" is the product of evolution by the virtue of its presumed "positive" impact on a culture. Only I do it with logic, not bible thumping so stay out of my debates.

Natural selection is based on sexual reproduction. If there is no passing of the genes from one to the next generation, there will not be an inherited trait. Even if the detrimental effect of homosexual failure to procreate were not enough to prove the concept false, the plain-as-day fact that such a trait is inherently racist by its nature proves the false logic of the claim.

Genes are selfish, period! Groups overcome selfish instincts by experience, but trust is vulnerability sooner or later if the group behavior is not constantly relearned from generation to generation, and it must be learned far faster than evolution could ever adjust for. Trust is also a negative attribute if it is simply a behavior learned by misdirected sexual gratification, and has no ability to discern a valuable group member from a parasite.

There! You have a logical argument. Not that you'll ever be able to use to do anything other than bludgeon yourself under the table!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.